LAU collection readmission data: Difference between revisions

Line 22:

Enter this even if the partner-record is also part of the [[LAU Collection Project]]; yes, we would be able to find that re-admission in our usual way, but having all the data coded the same way will make it more consistent to analyze.

~~{{DT|~~

==== Special case - both admission and re-admission are part of the LAU collection ====

* If the first admission and the readmission are part of our current review?, ~~do we~~ still enter the tmp project~~? or~~ will ~~you connect the two admissions when analyzing the data? [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 19:07, 4 March 2025 (CST)~~

Even if the first admission and the readmission are part of our current review, still enter the tmp project. This will make the stats more straightfwd.

** I think we should, that way the stats ~~are~~ more straightfwd ~~for this~~. ~~But we may want to know more about what~~ the ~~other admission was. Do we want to have more items, such as "previous med" or "later ICU"?~~ [[~~Readmission to MedWard~~]] ~~says "Readmission is attributed to the site or hospital from which the patient~~ was ~~discharged. "; so we would not need details for~~ the ~~future site, but might want them~~ for ~~the previous, even if we only did as little as "same" and "other". I started to add this above, if I got it right then pls delete this comment. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 19:00, 5 March 2025 (CST)~~

* do we include readmission if the previous admission was ICU? [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 11:39, 5 March 2025 (CST)

==== Special case - previous unit is an inpatient location ====

** [[Readmission to MedWard]] ~~only considers~~ it a re-admission ~~if they left the hospital setting in between~~. ~~Is that what you mean here, that they were in an ICU, went home and then came to LAU? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 19:00, 5 March 2025 (CST) }}~~

If the [[previous location]] was an inpatient location then the record doesn't meet criteria for [[Readmission to MedWard]], so '''don't''' mark it as a re-admission.

==== Sources ====

Line 33:

* Progress notes in chart

* EPR Patient information tab, visit history will list previous inpt admissions from within the city and some facilities outside the city

== Log ==

* 2025-03-06

** implemented

** [[Readmission to MedWard]] says "Readmission is attributed to the site or hospital from which the patient was discharged. "; so we would not need site details for "has later" since <this site> would be deemed responsible and it doesn't matter where the pt ends up next. However, we might want site details for "has previous", even if we only did as little as "same" and "other". I decided not to implement this for now since it wasn't requested, just documenting the consideration

== Data Use ==

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 Enter this even if the partner-record is also part of the [[LAU Collection Project]]; yes, we would be able to find that re-admission in our usual way, but having all the data coded the same way will make it more consistent to analyze.
-{{DT|
+==== Special case - both admission and re-admission are part of the LAU collection ====
-* If the first admission and the readmission are part of our current review?, do we still enter the tmp project? or will you connect the two admissions when analyzing the data? [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 19:07, 4 March 2025 (CST)
+Even if the first admission and the readmission are part of our current review, still enter the tmp project. This will make the stats more straightfwd.
-** I think we should, that way the stats are more straightfwd for this. But we may want to know more about what the other admission was. Do we want to have more items, such as "previous med" or "later ICU"? [[Readmission to MedWard]] says "Readmission is attributed to the site or hospital from which the patient was discharged. "; so we would not need details for the future site, but might want them for the previous, even if we only did as little as "same" and "other". I started to add this above, if I got it right then pls delete this comment. [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 19:00, 5 March 2025 (CST)
-* do we include readmission if the previous admission was ICU? [[User:Lkaita|Lisa Kaita]] 11:39, 5 March 2025 (CST)
+==== Special case - previous unit is an inpatient location ====
-** [[Readmission to MedWard]] only considers it a re-admission if they left the hospital setting in between. Is that what you mean here, that they were in an ICU, went home and then came to LAU? [[User:Ttenbergen|Ttenbergen]] 19:00, 5 March 2025 (CST) }}
+If the [[previous location]] was an inpatient location then the record doesn't meet criteria for [[Readmission to MedWard]], so '''don't''' mark it as a re-admission.
 ==== Sources ====
@@ Line 33: / Line 33: @@
 * Progress notes in chart
 * EPR Patient information tab, visit history will list previous inpt admissions from within the city and some facilities outside the city
+== Log ==
+* 2025-03-06
+** implemented
+** [[Readmission to MedWard]] says "Readmission is attributed to the site or hospital from which the patient was discharged. "; so we would not need site details for "has later" since <this site> would be deemed responsible and it doesn't matter where the pt ends up next. However, we might want site details for "has previous", even if we only did as little as "same" and "other". I decided not to implement this for now since it wasn't requested, just documenting the consideration
 == Data Use ==